Skip to main content

Full text of "Investigating the Kinematics of Coronal Mass Ejections with the Automated CORIMP Catalog"

See other formats


arXiv:1506.04046vl [astro-ph.SR] 12 Jun 2015 


submitted to Journal of Space Weather and Space Climate 

© The author(s) under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial license 


Investigating the Kinematics of Coronal Mass 
Ejections with the Automated CORIMP Catalog 

Jason P. Byrne 


RAL Space, Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Harwell Oxford, 0X11 OQX, UK. 
e-mail: jason.byrne@stfc.ac.uk 


ABSTRACT 

Studying coronal mass ejections (CMEs) in coronagraph data can be challenging due to their dif¬ 
fuse structure and transient nature, compounded by the variations in their dynamics, morphology, 
and frequency of occurrence. The large amounts of data available from missions like the Solar and 
Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO) make manual cataloging of CMEs tedious and prone to human 
error, and so a robust method of detection and analysis is required and often preferred. A new 
coronal image processing catalog called CORIMP has been developed in an effort to achieve this, 
through the implementation of a dynamic background separation technique and multiscale edge 
detection. These algorithms together isolate and characterise CME structure in the field-of-view 
of the Large Angle Spectrometric Coronagraph (LASCO) onboard SOHO. CORIMP also applies 
a Savitzky-Golay filter, along with quadratic and linear fits, to the height-time measurements for 
better revealing the true CME speed and acceleration profiles across the plane-of-sky. Here we 
present a sample of new results from the CORIMP CME catalog, and directly compare them with 
the other automated catalogs of Computer Aided CME Tracking (CACTus) and Solar Eruptive 
Events Detection System (SEEDS), as well as the manual CME catalog at the Coordinated Data 
Analysis Workshop (CDAW) Data Center and a previously published study of the sample events. 
We further investigate a form of unsupervised machine learning by using a £-means clustering al¬ 
gorithm to distinguish detections of multiple CMEs that occur close together in space and time. 
While challenges still exist, this investigation and comparison of results demonstrates the relia¬ 
bility and robustness of the CORIMP catalog, proving its effectiveness at detecting and tracking 
CMEs throughout the LASCO dataset. 

Key words. Sun - Coronal Mass Ejection (CME) - Space weather - Solar image processing - 
Machine learning 


1. Introduction 

Coronal mass ejections (CMEs) represent the largest, most dynamic phenomena that originate from 
the Sun (Chen, 2011; Webb and Howard, 2012). Propagating at speeds of up to thousands of kilo¬ 
metres per second, with energies on the order of 10 32 ergs, they can drive adverse space weather 
throughout the solar system (Howard and Tappin, 2005; Pulkkinen, 2007). Given their potentially 


1 



J. P. Byme: Investigating the Kinematics of CMEs with the Automated CORIMP Catalog 


hazardous impact on Earth’s geomagnetic environment, the physics governing their eruption and 
propagation needs to be understood so that their effects may be predicted in the guise of space- 
weather forecasting. To this end, observations of CMEs must be rigorously inspected in order to 
determine their dynamics, and this is most commonly undertaken with the use of coronagraph 
instruments (e.g., Koomen et al., 1975; Sheeley et al., 1980; MacQueen et al., 1980; Illing and 
Hundhausen, 1985; Hundhausen, 1993; Brueckner et al., 1995; Howard et al., 2008). 

CMEs tend to be faint, transient phenomena, observed in white-light images that are prone to 
noise and user-dependent biases in their interpretation. During solar minimum, CMEs can occur 
every few days, but at solar maximum there can be several per day (St. Cyr et al., 2000; Yashiro 
et a] , 2004). They exhibit a wide variety of morphologies, moving in unpredictable directions 
and speeds in the solar wind (Kilpua et al., 2009; Byme et al., 2010; Liu et al., 2014). They can 
drive shocks in the solar atmosphere and interplanetary space ( toward and I , ; arley 

et al., 2013), and exhibit various levels of geo-effectiveness (Plunkett et al., ; chwenn et al , 
2005; Davis et al., 2009; Lugaz and Kintner, 2012). A wealth of image processing techniques have 
been explored to study CMEs in remote-sensing image data provided by such instruments as the 
Large Angle Spectrometric Coronagraph (LASCO; Brueckner et al., 1 ) onboard the Solar and 

Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO; )omingo et al , ). These techniques generally rely on some 

form of image differencing to highlight moving features in the observed intensities, but this intro¬ 
duces spatiotemporal crosstalk and scaling issues that affect the accuracy of CME characterisations. 
For example, the distance a CME moves between frames of varying cadence, along with its in¬ 
herent morphological and brightness changes during that time, directly affects the calculations of 
running-difference images - to the point of changing how a user or algorithm characterises the CME 
structure and consequently its dynamics. More advanced image processing methods have thus been 
explored, such as optical flow techniques ( 'olaninno and Vourlidas, 2006), supervised segmentation 
techniques (Goussies et al., 2010), wavelets (Stenborg and Cobelli, 2003) and curvelets (Gallagher 
et al , 201 ). The large volume of data available has made it necessary to automate such techniques 
for detecting and tracking CMEs across images, with a view to cataloging their kinematics and 
morphologies. This allows for more robust CME detections by avoiding the troublesome effects of 
standard image differencing techniques. It is therefore possible to maintain a non-biased character¬ 
isation of the CME structure in every event, since automated techniques are self-consistent. 

To date, a point-and-click catalog of CMEs in LASCO data has been undertaken at the 
Coordinated Data Analysis Workshop (CDAW) Data Center (Gopalswamy et al , 2009), which 
operates by tracking CMEs in running difference images to produce information on the dynam¬ 
ics of each event. The CDAW Catalog is produced by a manual procedure and is therefore sub¬ 
ject to user bias in interpreting the data. Automated catalogs have since been developed to over¬ 
come this bias and tedium. The Computer Aided CME Tracking routine (CACTus; Tobbrecht and 
Berghmans, 20C ) is the first such automated catalog. It works by using a Hough transform ( [on , 
1962) to detect intensity ridges corresponding to CME tracks in time-height stacks (J-maps) of 
polar-unwrapped running-difference LASCO images. The Solar Eruptive Events Detection System 
(SEEDS; Imedo et a , ) is another automated catalog that similarly uses polar-unwrapped 

running-difference LASCO images but with a form of threshold segmentation to approximate the 
shape of the CME leading edge in every image. A new automated catalog called CORIMP has re¬ 
cently been developed from a unique set of coronal image processing techniques, that overcomes 
many of the limitations of current catalogs in operation (Morgan et a , 12; Byrne et al., 2 ). 


2 


J. P. Byme: Investigating the Kinematics of CMEs with the Automated CORIMP Catalog 


An online database has been produced for the SOHO/LASCO data and event detections therein. It 
provides information on CME onset time, position angle, angular width, speed, acceleration, and 
mass, along with kinematic plots and observation movies. Such a wealth of information is crucial 
for understanding the dynamics of CMEs. Furthermore, a realtime version of the algorithm has been 
implemented to provide CME detection alerts to the interested space weather community 1 . 

In Section 2 the CME catalogs are discussed in greater detail to highlight their methodologies and 
drawbacks. A sample of CMEs is then investigated in Section 3 in order to compare the outputs of 
each catalog, paying particular interest to the robustness and reliability of the new CORIMP catalog. 
In Section 4 a first effort is made to use a form of unsupervised machine learning to isolate spatially 
and temporally overlapping CME detections. The conclusions of this investigation are presented in 
Section 5. 

2. Cataloging CMEs 

In coronagraph images CMEs are observed as outwardly moving clouds of plasma, that appear 
relatively bright against the background corona (see the example in Fig. 1). Different methods for 
thresholding the CME brightness in such images have been employed by different catalogs. This 
is in order to detect their appearance and track their motion through the field-of-view, leading to a 
determination of the CME kinematics and morphology. However, each method suffers from draw¬ 
backs and, as such, the resulting CME catalogs can vary significantly in their characterisations and 
measurements of each event. 

2.1. CORIMP Automated Catalog 

The CORIMP 2 catalog was developed with a method of dynamic signal separation and multiscale 
edge detection to overcome certain drawbacks of previous detection and tracking methods that rely 
on running-difference images. The CME signal is separated from the more quiescent streamers and 
coronal structures in LASCO/C2 and C3 images, such that a multiscale filtering technique may be 
used to suppress noise in order to characterise the CME structure and track its motion. A spread 
of heights of the CME front is then measured across its angular span. A type of cleaning algo¬ 
rithm is applied to the height-time measurements before the kinematics are determined. This is 
required to overcome cases where pixels along the CME front edges at a specific position angle are 
not correctly identified, but rather a pixel corresponding to core material behind the CME front is 
measured, which causes unnecessary scatter in the height-time datapoints. The cleaning algorithm 
works by stepping along the height-time measurements at each position angle and requiring that 
only sequentially increasing heights are plotted. This helps remove the detections of trailing CME 
material from the height-time plots such that only the kinematics of the main CME front are de¬ 
termined. The kinematics are then derived in three ways: using a Savitzky-Golay filter ( avitzky 
and Golay, 1964), a quadratic fit (second-order polynomial), and a linear fit (straight-line). The 
importance of a robust method for determining the kinematics of a transient event is discussed in 

1 Automated email alerts may be requested from the author, and are also published on social media at 

twitter.com/CMEcatalog and facebook.com/CMEcatalog 

2 http://alshamess.ifa.hawaii.edu/CORIMP 


3 



J. P. Byrne: Investigating the Kinematics of CMEs with the Automated CORIMP Catalog 



2000/01/02 07:54 

2000/01/02 oAS^Ob 

TimeL_Diff= 59 (min) 

PAs= 213 505 
Hefght= 4.9 (Rs) 




Fig. 1 . LASCO/C2 observations of a CME on 2000 Jan. 02 at 07:54 UT. Top left: A level 2 
background-model subtracted image of the event. Top right: Running difference image reproduced 
from the CACTus catalog with the angular span of the CME detection indicated by the white lines. 
(The manual CDAW catalog uses similar such running-difference images.) Bottom left: Running 
difference image reproduced from the SEEDS catalog with the CME front detection highlighted 
in red (and the extended ‘half-max lead’ in purple). Bottom right: Normalised radial-gradient fil¬ 
tered (NRGF) image taken from the CORIMP catalog with the angular span of the CME detection 
indicated in blue, the pixel-chained CME structure in yellow, and the CME front in red. 


Byrne et a ( ), wherein the often-used method of 3-point Lagrangian interpolation and associ- 


4 










J. P. Byrne: Investigating the Kinematics of CMEs with the Automated CORIMP Catalog 


CDAW 

20000102.053005.wl 07n.v0603.p240s. 




06:00 07:00 08:00 09:00 10:00 

Start Time (O2-Jan-0O 05:00:05) 


Velocity distribution 




Fig. 2. The kinematic outputs for the 2000 Jan. 02 CME reproduced from the CDAW, SEEDS and 
CACTus catalogs. Top left: The CDAW catalog height-time measurements of the CME chosen 
manually along the running-difference bright front (at position angle 240) with a second-order fit. 
Bottom left: The corresponding CDAW speed profile plotted against height, showing an accelera¬ 
tion of 21.57 m ,s“ 2 . Top right: The automated SEEDS height-time measurements and second-order 
fit resulting in an acceleration of 18.6 m s~ 2 in the LASCO/C2 field-of-view. Bottom right: The au¬ 
tomated CACTus velocities determined along the angular span of the CME, with a corresponding 
box-and-whisker plot to highlight the median (548 km .v -1 ) and interquartile range. 


ated error-propagation were shown to behave counter-intuitively and provide misleading kinematic 
results. It was shown that the Savtizky-Golay smoothing filter performs well on CME height-time 
data, through its use of a kernel-based estimation of a local polynomial regression, that also directly 
computes the derivatives of the parameters to provide the kinematics. The number of data points 
either side of the case point to be included in the filter is also specified, being optimised for the ca¬ 
dence of the data. The three automated fitting techniques in CORIMP are useful for comparing with 
the other catalogs, and offer a degree of freedom for the user to chose the output most appropriate 
to their interests (e.g., a linear fit can provide an average CME speed over the observed interval, 
while the Savitzky-Golay filter can reveal changes to the acceleration in that interval). 


5 






J. P. Byme: Investigating the Kinematics of CMEs with the Automated CORIMP Catalog 


2.2. CACTus Automated Catalog 

The CACTus 3 catalog was the first automated CME detection algorithm, in operation since 2004. 
It is based upon the detection of CMEs as bright ridges in time-height slices at each angle around 
a coronagraph image. A running-difference technique is applied to each image, before it is trans¬ 
formed into Sun-centred polar coordinates. These images are then re-binned and the separate C2 
and C3 fields-of-view are combined. These are then stacked in time, and for each angle the cor¬ 
responding time-height slice undergoes a modified Hough transform for detecting intensity ridges 
across it. Thresholding the most significant ridges filters out the progression of CMEs, with the 
variables for each ridge characterised by onset time, speed, and position angle. The median speed 
across the angular span of each event is quoted as the CME speed. 

The running-difference cadence, the ridge intensity threshold, and the imposed limit on how 
many frames a CME may exist, all affect how successful the automated detection can be. However, 
Robbrecht and Berghmans (2004) show the algorithm to be robust in reproducing the detections of a 
human user by directly comparing with the CDAW catalog. The main drawback of the CACTus cat¬ 
alog is that it cannot resolve CME acceleration, since the Hough transform thresholds the ridges as 
straight lines whose slopes provide a constant speed. The speed itself may also be an underestimate 
since it is a median across the span of the CME, although having a spread of speed measurements 
across position angles is an advantage of CACTus (see the example speed plot at the bottom right of 
Fig. 2). However, it is sometimes possible that the angular spans are over-estimated since side out¬ 
flows in the images are enhanced by the running-difference and may include streamer deflections. 
It is also difficult to distinguish when one CME has fully progressed from the field-of-view and 
another CME has entered it, so in some cases trailing portions of a CME are detected as separate 
events. 

2.3. SEEDS Automated Catalog 

The SEEDS 4 catalog employs an automated CME detection algorithm for tracking an intensity 
thresholded CME front in running-difference images from LASCO/C2. The images are unwrapped 
into Sun-centred polar coordinates, and a normalised running-difference technique is applied (such 
that the mean intensity of the new image is effectively zero). The pixel intensities (positive values 
only) are then summed along angles and thresholded at a certain number of standard deviations 
above the mean intensity. This determines the “core angles” of the CME, and a region growing 
technique based on a secondary threshold of intensities in the rest of the image is applied to open 
the angular span to include the full CME. An issue arises when streamer deflections occur that 
offset the region growing technique and overestimate the CME angular width. An intensity average 
across the angles within the span of the CME is then determined, and where the forward portion 
of this intensity profile equals half its maximum value is taken as the CME height. The speed 
and acceleration are determined from the heights through consecutive images and these results are 
output with the CME position angle and angular width in the SEEDS catalog (see the example 
height-time plot at the top right of Fig. 2). 


3 http://sidc.oma.be/cactus/ 

4 http://spaceweather.gmu.edu/seeds/ 


6 



J. P. Byme: Investigating the Kinematics of CMEs with the Automated CORIMP Catalog 


Along with the issues of streamer deflections and the tracking being limited to only the C2 field- 
of-view, the choice of the “Half-Max-Lead” as the CME height is dependant on the overall CME 
brightness, and thus any brightness change during its propagation will affect this measurement. 
This adds to the error on the height-time profile, which affects the accuracy of the derived speed 
and acceleration. 

2.4. CDAW Manual Catalog 

The CME catalog hosted at the CDAW Data Center 5 grew out of a necessity to record a simple 
but effective description and analysis of each event observed with LASCO (Gopalswamy et al., 
2009). The catalog is wholly manual in its operation, with a user tracking the CME through C2 and 
C3 running-difference images and producing a “point-&-click” height-time plot of each event. A 
linear fit to the height-time profiles provides a lst-order estimate for the plane-of-sky speed, and a 
quadratic fit provides a 2nd-order speed fit and an acceleration for the event. The central position 
angle and angular width of the CME are also deduced from the images, and the event is flagged 
as a halo if it spans 360°, partial halo if it spans > 120°, and wide if it spans > 60°. The catalog 
itself lists each CME’s first appearance in C2, central position angle, angular width, linear speed, 
2nd-order speed at final height, 2nd-order speed at 20 Rq, acceleration, mass, kinetic energy, and 
measurement position angle (the angle along which the heights of the CME are determined; see the 
example height-time and speed-height plots in the left of Fig. 2). While the human eye is supremely 
effective at distinguishing CMEs in coronagraph images, errors may be introduced to the manual 
cataloging procedure through the biases of different operators; for example, in deciding how the 
images are scaled, where along the CME the heights are measured, or whether a CME is worth 
including in, or discarding from, the catalog. 


3. CME Event Sample and Catalog Results 

A selection of CMEs from the SOHO/LASCO data was chosen in the analysis of yrne et a ( ), 

wherein multiscale methods of edge detection and a resulting ellipse characterisation of the CME 
front were used to track its apex. These events were chosen based on their varying styles of erup¬ 
tion and appearance, in order to compare with the measurements of the manual CDAW catalog (see 
images of each CME in Fig. 5 of Byrne et al. 2009). They exhibit various forms that typical CMEs 
in coronagraph observations can take, to serve as examples of how the detection and characterisa¬ 
tion algorithms fare on each, and how well their varying kinematic trends are revealed. The images 
were not differenced so that the problematics effects of spatiotemporal cross-talk were avoided. The 
uncertainties on the height measurements were quantified by the multiscale filter size and subse¬ 
quent ellipse-fitting, and propagated into the kinematics via numerical differentiation using 3-point 
Lagrangian interpolation. However, it has since been demonstrated by rne et a ( ) that this 

method for deriving kinematics is not wholly reliable, and other approaches must be considered as 
discussed in Section 2.1 above. Following the development of the automated CORIMP algorithms, 
these events are now revisited in this new catalog and directly compared with the other automated 
CACTus and SEEDS catalogs, the manual CDAW catalog, and the results of Byrne et al. (2009). In 

5 http://cdaw.gsfc.nasa.gov/CME_list 


7 



J. P. Byrne: Investigating the Kinematics of CMEs with the Automated CORIMP Catalog 


CME Date & Start Time 

Catalog 

CPA [deg.] 

Width [deg.] 

Lin. Speed [km s l ] 

Accel, [ms 2 ] 

2000 Jan. 02 -06:06 UT 

CORIMP 

250 

81 83 

454 743 

i 14 

i -17 

(Arcade eruption) 

CACTus 

250 

106 

548™ 


SEEDS 

257 

96 

292 

18.6 


CDAW 

253 

107 

603 

21.6 

2000 Apr. 18 -14:54 UT 

CORIMP 

210 

98 

431 537 

4 15 

-li 

(Gradual CME) 

CACTus 

198 

102 

463™ 


SEEDS 

195 

108 

338 

17.7 


CDAW 

195 

105 

668 

23.1 

2000 Apr. 23 ~12:54UT 

CORIMP 

287 

119 123 

836 1/06 

- 11 30 

-154 

(Impulsive CME) 

CACTus 

144 

360 

1H4 1849 

11 1h 245 


SEEDS 

275 

130 

594 

-8.5 


CDAW 

281 

360 

1187 

-48.5 

2001 Apr. 23 -12:39UT 

CORIMP 

232 

72 74 

187 283 

3 13 

-13 

(Faint CME) 

CACTus 

231 

88 

459^ 


SEEDS 

224 

77 

408 

-46.6 


CDAW 

228 

91 

530 

-0.7 

2002 Apr. 21 -01:26 UT 

CORIMP 

235 

154 1/7 

1129™ 

61 345 
-619 

(Fast CME) 

CACTus 

322 

352 

H03 1913 


SEEDS 

250 

186 

703 

31.8 


CDAW 

282 

360 

2393 

-1.4 

2004 Apr. 1 -23:04 UT 

CORIMP 

58 

42 44 

401 502 

9I8 

-22 

(Slow CME) 

CACTus 

60 

70 

485 829 

* OJ 244 


SEEDS 

60 

59 

261 

19.7 


CDAW 

59 

79 

460 

7.1 

Table 1. Catalog measurements of a 

sample of CMEs observed by SOHO/LASCO. CME Date & 

Start Time refers to the first observation of the CME in LASCO. CPA refers to the central position 


angle of the CME. Width refers to the angular span, or opening angle, of the CME. Lin. Speed 
is the derived speed of the CME using a linear fit to the height-time measurements. Accel, is the 
derived acceleration of the CME using a second-order fit to the height-time measurements. Note, 
some values have a corresponding maximum and/or minimum (x™*) as specified in the respective 
catalogs. 


each case below, the tabled information and kinematic plots are reproduced directly from the online 
catalogs, and not rescaled or otherwise manipulated, for a fair comparison. 


3.1. Arcade eruption: 2000 January 2 

The CME that erupted off the southeast limb of the Sun on 2000 Jan. 02 from -06:06 UT in LASCO 
exhibited an arcade-type structure consisting of multiple bright loops. CORIMP identified the bulk 
of the CME through the LASCO field-of-view to -24 R 0 . However, this CME may be deemed the 
third in a series of four CMEs that occurred in succession off the southeast limb, that CORIMP 
failed to separate due to their spatial and temporal overlap (essentially a smaller CME in between 


8 



J. P. Byrne: Investigating the Kinematics of CMEs with the Automated CORIMP Catalog 


t 

O) 

£ 


Height (R @ ) 


8 13 17 21 25 


o 

o 

o 

rsi 


E : 

GF 




fN 

O 


O 

O 

O 

fN 





o 

o 

o 

C\l 




100 


200 


300 


Position Angle (degrees) 


Fig. 3. Daily detection stacks reproduced from the CORIMP CME catalog for the SOHO/LASCO 
observations in the date range 2000 Jan. 01 -03. These stacks are generated from the automatically 
measured CME front heights at every position angle in an image, stacked in time. CMEs appear as 
groupings of colour-graded pixels, as indicated by the boxed regions. The overlapping CMEs in this 
time interval are boxed in red, corresponding to the height-time profiles in Fig. 4 (that have been 
put through the cleaning algorithm). 


two large ones connects their detections along with a fourth smaller one afterwards, as seen in the 
CORIMP CME detection stacks reproduced in Fig. 3 - see Byrne et al. 201 for details). This there¬ 
fore serves as an example of the need to inspect the catalog output before trusting the quoted values 
listed in Table 1. The CORIMP height-time measurements (in the time range ~06:00-16:00 UT in 
Fig. 4) reveal a non-linear trend indicative of an early acceleration that the Savitzky-Golay filter de¬ 
termines decreases from a maximum of ~50 m s~ 2 to 0 m s~ 2 , as the maximum speed levels off in the 
range of ~500- 600 km s _1 . This is consistent with the measurements of lyrne et ( )09) shown 
in their Fig. 6. The quadratic (and linear) fits in CORIMP agree with a maximum speed in this 
range of ~500-600fcm5 _1 and an acceleration in the range of approximately ±20/ns' 2 . CACTus 


9 







































J. P. Byrne: Investigating the Kinematics of CMEs with the Automated CORIMP Catalog 


2.0xio 4 r 


_ Position Angle (deg.) 

209 223 236 230 263 277 290 


Sovitzky-Goloy Filter 


1.5X10 4 


5.0x10 J 


_ Position Angle (deg.) 

209 223 236 230 263 277 290 




5.0X10 3 



00:00 08:00 16:00 00:00 
Stort Time (01-Jon-00 12:53:07) 



Stort Time (01-Jon-00 12:53:07) 


Fig. 4. Kinematic plots of the 2000 Jan. 02 CME from the automatic detection and tracking in the 
CORIMP catalog. The top plots show the height-time measurements with a colorbar to indicate the 
angular span of the data points, and solid black lines to indicate the fitting. The middle and bottom 
plots show the speed and acceleration profiles of the CME with the median (solid line), interquartile 
range (inner dashed lines) and upper and lower fences (outer dashed lines) over-plotted. The left 
plots are determined by a Savitzky-Golar filter applied to the height-time measurements with a 
7-point moving window, while the right plots are determined with a second-order quadratic fit. 


determined a linear speed of 548 km s~ [ (in the range 231 -744km s -1 ). SEEDS determined a lin¬ 
ear speed of 292 km s 1-1 and an acceleration of 18.6ms -2 (in the C2 field-of-view). And CDAW 
determined a linear speed of 603 km s ~ 1 and an overall acceleration of 21.6/ns' 2 . These catalog 
measurements are listed in Table 1. (Note that the slightly lower angular width in CORIMP is due 
to the exclusion of part of the questionable streamer deflection/interaction along the southern flank 
of the CME.) Therefore, by inspection, the results of the CORIMP CME catalog are in agreement 
with the other catalogs and manual analysis of this event, and CORIMP is deemed robust albeit 
unreliable at separating overlapping events. 


10 



























































J. P. Byrne: Investigating the Kinematics of CMEs with the Automated CORIMP Catalog 


2.0x10 4 


1.5X10 4 


5.0x10 3 


_ Position Angle (deg.) 

161 177 194 210 226 243 259 




21:00 00:00 03:00 

Stort Time (18-Apr-00 14:42:39) 


Position Angle (deg.) 


161 177 194 210 226 243 259 



2.0x10 4 


1.5X10 4 


I.OxlO 4 


5.0x10 3 


18:00 21:00 00:00 03:00 

Stort Time (18-Apr-00 14:42:39) 


ft ti i 


25 

20 


10 

5 

0 


Fig. 5. Kinematic plots of the 2000 Apr. 18 CME from the automatic detection and tracking in the 
CORIMP catalog, as in Fig. 4. 


3.2. Gradual CME: 2000 April 18 

The CME that erupted off the south limb of the Sun on 2000 Apr. 18 from ~ 14:54 UT in LASCO 
exhibited a typical 3-part structure of leading CME front, cavity and bright core. CORIMP identified 
the bulk of the CME through the LASCO field-of-view to ~25 R Q , though it did not detect a southern 
portion of the faint CME front in the latter C3 observations. A western portion of material also 
erupted as a delayed part of the northern flank of the CME, that appears as a somewhat secondary 
height-time profile in the CORIMP kinematic plots in Fig. 5 (at position angles -250° in the redder 
end of the colorbar). The CORIMP height-time measurements reveal a non-linear trend indicative 
of an early acceleration that the Savitzky-Golay filter determines to be approximately 20 m s~ 2 as 
the speed increases to over 400 km s -1 before the data gap in the LASCO/C3 images between 19:42 
and 21:24 UT causes a large scatter in the derived kinematics (e.g., an artificial acceleration peak of 
> 100 m s~ 2 ). The initial increasing speed profile up to a maximum in the range ~600 - 800 km .v _l by 
~20:00 UT agrees with that of Byrne et al. (2009) as shown in their Fig. 7. The quadratic (and linear) 
fits in CORIMP are not as prone to the scattering effects of the data gap, and thus derive a slightly 
lower maximum speed range of ~500 - 550 km s~ l and an acceleration in the range of approximately 


11 











































J. P. Byrne: Investigating the Kinematics of CMEs with the Automated CORIMP Catalog 


2.0x10 4 


1.5X10 4 


5.0x10 J 


_ Position Angle (deg.) 

227 247 267 287 306 326 346 


_ Position Angle (deg.) 

227 247 267 287 306 326 346 




5.0X10 3 




16:00 18:00 
Stort Time (23-Apr-00 12:29:36) 


16:00 18:00 
Stort Time (23-Apr-00 12:29:36) 


Fig. 6. Kinematic plots of the 2000 Apr. 23 CME from the automatic detection and tracking in the 
CORIMP catalog, as in Fig. 4. 


±15 ms~ 2 . CACTus determined a linear speed of 463 km s~ ] (in the range 227-744 km s~ l ). SEEDS 
determined a linear speed of 338 km s~ l and an acceleration of 17.7 m s~ 2 (in the C2 field-of-view). 
And CD AW determined a linear speed of 668 km s' 1 and an overall acceleration of 23.1 ms~ 2 . 
Therefore, by inspection, all sets of results are in agreement for this event. 

3.3. Impulsive CME: 2000 April 23 

The large and fast CME that erupted off the west limb of the Sun on 2000 Apr. 23 from -12:54 UT in 
LASCO underwent a hugely impulsive acceleration as it exploded into the corona. CORIMP iden¬ 
tified the bulk of the CME through the LASCO field-of-view to ~20 R Q after which the CME front 
became too faint. Strong streamer deflections occurred to the north and south flanks of the CME, 
with very faint material visible as a full halo or shock around the east limb separate to the bulk 
flux-rope structure in the west. The CORIMP height-time measurements (Fig. 6) reveal an initial 
acceleration that the Savitzky-Golay filter determines to be >150m s~ 2 dropping quickly to a range 
of approximately -100 to 0 ms~ 2 , as the speed decreases from -1000 to 500 km s -1 ; though this 
is an underestimate since the filter overly smoothes the relatively under-sampled height-time mea- 


12 










































J. P. Byrne: Investigating the Kinematics of CMEs with the Automated CORIMP Catalog 


2.0xio 4 r 


_ Position Angle (deg.) 

196 208 220 252 244 256 


Position Angle (deg.) 

IS £ 


Sovitzky-Goloy Filter 


1.5X10 4 


5.0x10 J 




5.0x10 3 



12:00 18:00 00:00 06:00 
Stort Time (23-Apr-01 06:40:08) 



Stort Time (23-Apr-01 06:40:08) 


Fig. 7. Kinematic plots of the 2001 Apr. 23 CME from the automatic detection and tracking in the 
CORIMP catalog, as in Fig. 4. 


surements. The quadratic fits in CORIMP better handle this data and derive an initial speed range 
of ~1200- 1500 kms -1 , while the linear fits derive an initial speed range of ~ 1000- 1200 kms~ l , 
which are consistent with the measurements of rne et a ( ) shown in their Fig. 8. The re¬ 

sulting deceleration is determined to have a median of approximately -50 m s~ 2 , reaching as low 
as -150 m s~ 2 . CACTus determined a linear speed of 1114 km s -1 (in the range 245 -1849 km s 1-1 ). 
SEEDS determined a linear speed of 594 km s -1 and a deceleration of -8.5 m s~ 2 (in the C2 field- 
of-view). And CDAW determined a linear speed of 1187 kms~ l and an overall deceleration of 
-48.5 m .s’ -2 . Therefore, by inspection and careful consideration of the low sampling of the event, 
the results of the CORIMP CME catalog are in agreement with the corresponding results of the 
other catalogs and manual analysis. 

3.4. Faint CME: 2001 April 23 

The CME that erupted off the southwest limb of the Sun on 2001 Apr. 23 from ~12:54UT in 
LASCO appeared relatively faint behind multiple streamers in the line-of-sight, some of which de¬ 
flected especially along the southern flank of the CME. CORIMP identified the bulk of the CME 


13 



































































J. P. Byme: Investigating the Kinematics of CMEs with the Automated CORIMP Catalog 


through the LASCO field-of-view to -20 R e after which the CME front became too faint. However, 
this CME was the first of two that occurred in close succession off the southwest limb, that CORIMP 
failed to separate due to their spatial and temporal overlap (plus some ejecta ahead of this CME was 
detected from -08:16 UT). Therefore the kinematic profiles must be inspected before trusting the 
quoted catalog values listed in Table 1. Investigating the relevant portion of the plots in Fig. 7, in the 
time interval — 12:00- 18:00 UT, the CORIMP height-time measurements reveal an initial acceler¬ 
ation that the Savitzky-Golay filter determines to be -10 ms~ 2 dropping to scatter about zero as the 
maximum speed levels off at ~350 km s 1-1 ; though this is an underestimate since the measurements 
are dominated by the material ahead of the CME front that the algorithm detected as part of the 
main event (from -08:00-12:00 UT). The quadratic fits to the measurements are more dominated 
by the overall deceleration of the CME (approx. -10ms' 2 from 12:00UT onwards) as the speed 
drops from an initial range of ~550-650 km .v _l (consistent with Byrne et al. 2009 shown in their 
Fig. 9) to ~400 km s 1-1 by 18:00 UT; though this appears biased to lower values by the overlapping 
measurements of the second CME. The linear fits are less trustworthy as they tend to fit across the 
two CMEs and preceding ejected material, resulting in the underestimated CORIMP linear speed in 
Table 1. CACTus determined a linear speed of 459 kms~ l (in the range 315-602kms _1 ). SEEDS 
determined a linear speed of 408 km s~ l and a deceleration of -46.6 m s~ 2 (in the C2 field-of-view), 
however it failed to detect the CME front in the final frames which accounts for this erroneously 
large deceleration. And CDAW determined a linear speed of 530 km s~ 1 and an overall deceleration 
of -0.7 m s~ 2 . Therefore, while all sets of results are found to be in agreement, there is again the 
issue of separating overlapping event kinematics. 

3.5. Fast CME: 2002 April 21 

The CME that erupted off the west limb of the Sun on 2002 Apr. 21 from -01:27 UT in LASCO 
propagated very fast through the field-of-view. CORIMP identified the bulk of the CME through the 
LASCO field-of-view to -17 R© after which the CME front became too faint, and only the southern 
flank material continued to be detected. Figure 8 shows the CORIMP height-time measurements, 
which the Savitzky-Golay filter struggles to fit appropriately due to the small window-size available 
at each position angle (as the filter requires a minimum of 7 data points). The quadratic fits to the 
data reveal a high initial acceleration of >1000 ms~ 2 followed by a deceleration in the range of 
approximately -500 to 0ms~ 2 . The speed shows an initial range of -2000-2500 km s -1 possibly 
reaching -3000 km s' 1 before dropping to -1000 kms~ l , which is consistent with the measurements 
of rne et a ( ) shown in their Fig. 10. The linear fits also reveal an initial speed range of 

-2000 - 2500 km .v _l dropping to -1000 km s~ 1 . CACTus determined a linear speed of 1103 km .v _l 
(in the range 298-1913 km s -1 ). SEEDS determined a linear speed of 703 km s~ 1 and an acceler¬ 
ation of 31.8 m s 2 (in the C2 field-of-view), however these cannot be trusted as the CME front is 
only visible in two C2 frames. And CDAW determined a linear speed of 2393 km s -1 and an overall 
deceleration of -1.4 m s~ 2 . Therefore, it is found that the Savitzky-Golay filter can be unreliable for 
characterising low-sampled events, but the quadratic and linear fits remain reliable and robust. 

3.6. Slow CME: 2004 April 1 

The CME that erupted off the northeast limb of the Sun on 2004 Apr. 01 from -23:05 UT in 
LASCO, exhibited a clear flux-rope structure and propagated relatively slowly. CORIMP identi- 


14 


J. P. Byrne: Investigating the Kinematics of CMEs with the Automated CORIMP Catalog 


_ Position Angle (deg.) 

158 184 209 255 261 286 512 


_ Position Angle (deg.) 

158 184 209 255 261 286 512 




5.0X10 3 



02:00 04:00 06:00 

Stort Time (21-Apr-02 00:24:53) 



Fig. 8. Kinematic plots of the 2002 Apr. 21 CME from the automatic detection and tracking in the 
CORIMP catalog, as in Fig. 4. 


lied the bulk of the CME through the LASCO field-of-view to -20 R Q after which the CME front 
became too faint. Figure 9 shows the CORIMP height-time measurements, which are plentiful given 
the slow motion and clean detection of the event. These measurements reveal an initial acceleration 
that the Savitzky-Golay filter determines to be >25 m s~ 2 dropping to 0 m s~ 2 by the time the CME 
reaches ~15 /?© and the maximum speed levels off in the range -500-600 km s~ l . The quadratic 
fits to the data reveal a bulk speed in the range -400-600 km s ~ 1 , with an overall deceleration of 
the CME of approximately -5 m s~ 2 . The linear fits also produce a speed in this range. These results 
are consistent with the measurements of yme et a ( ) shown in their Fig. 11, though with¬ 

out reproducing the “staggered” speed profile. CACTus determined a linear speed of 485 km s _1 (in 
the range 244-829 km ,v _l ). SEEDS determined a linear speed of 261 km .v _l and overall accelera¬ 
tion of 19.7 m s~ 2 (in the C2 field-of-view). And CDAW determined a linear speed of 460 km s -1 
and an overall acceleration of 7.1 ms~ 2 . Therefore, by inspection, CORIMP and the other CME 
characterisations are in agreement for this event. 


15 












































J. P. Byrne: Investigating the Kinematics of CMEs with the Automated CORIMP Catalog 


Position Angle (deg.) 


37 44 51 58 65 72 79 



2.0xio 4 r 


Sovitzky-Goloy Filter 


1.5X10 4 


00:00 03:00 06:00 09:00 12:00 

Stort Time (01-Apr-04 22:22:55) 


Position Angle (deg.) 



00:00 03:00 06:00 09:00 12:00 

Stort Time (01-Apr-04 22:22:55) 


Fig. 9. Kinematic plots of the 2004 Apr. 01 CME from the automatic detection and tracking in the 
CORIMP catalog, as in Fig. 4. 


4. Separating Multiple CME Detections via A-means Clustering 

The case studies in the previous section highlight a key issue in the automatic detection, tracking 
and cataloging of CMEs: namely the difficulties in distinguishing between multiple events that 
occur close together in space and time. The events of Section 3.1 and 3.4 demonstrate how the 
CORIMP catalog can fail to separately characterise CMEs that a human user would label as distinct 
events (although even this can be a non-trivial task since projection effects can make it hard to 
determine if two CMEs are truly merging in space or simply overlapping on the plane-of-sky). The 
reason for this, is that the thresholds in place to identify the beginning of a new CME detection 
cannot readily determine the end of a previous CME detection whose trailing material overlaps 
the subsequent CME material on the plane-of-sky. Other observational factors can help a human 
user distinguish the two, such as the differing speeds, densities, brightness and cohesiveness of 
the structure. However, these differences are too subtle to employ in an automated algorithm that 
must be able to characterise all manner of CMEs with a large variety of such properties; and so 
the overlapping CMEs are classified as a single event. While it is still possible to investigate their 
separate kinematic trends, as in Section 3.1 and 3.4, this is not ideal for accurately counting CMEs 


16 


















































J. P. Byrne: Investigating the Kinematics of CMEs with the Automated CORIMP Catalog 


Apply k-means 
clustering (k=3) 


\7 



Apply k-means 
clustering (k=4) 



Clusters Clusters 






Fig. 10. A k-means clustering algorithm applied to the height-time data on 2000 Jan. 01-03 (from 
Fig. 4), in an effort to distinguish the multiple CME profiles that were detected as a single event 
due to their close proximity in space and time. Top plot: The height-time measurements of the 
CME detections from the automated CORIMP catalog. (Note, this dataset has been put through a 
cleaning algorithm, discussed in Section 2.1, that removes a lot of inner-core and trailing-material 
datapoints, thus making it easier to distinguish their separate profiles.) Middle plots: The resulting 
clusters for the cases of k = 3 (left) and k = 4 (right), applied to the normalised parameters of the 
slope of a linear fit to, and the mean time of, the height-time profile at each position angle. The 
clusters are distinguished by different plot symbols and colours, with black asterisks to indicate 
the mean of each cluster. Bottom plots: The resulting effort at separately distinguishing the CME 
height-time profiles. 


nor for reliably producing independent CME detection alerts. It therefore remains a challenge to 
employ some form of machine intelligence in cataloging CMEs, which can use the CME detection 
parameters to reveal instances when multiple CMEs occur together. 


17 































J. P. Byrne: Investigating the Kinematics of CMEs with the Automated CORIMP Catalog 


Apply k-means 
clustering (k=4) 


2.0x1 cr 



1.5x10* 

T 

2T 1.0x10* 

£ 

__ 5.0x10 5 

r =* : 

J / f' \ 

20 

1 5 of 

10 

1 

rjrf~ .. i 

5 1 - 

0 

12:00 18:00 00:00 06:00 12:00 

0 


\7 


Stort Time (23-Apr-01 06:40:08) 


Apply k-means 
clustering (k=4) 


Clusters Clusters 






Fig. 11. A k-means clustering algorithm applied to the height-time data on 2001 Apr. 23-24 (from 
Fig. 7), in an effort to distinguish the multiple CME profiles, as in Fig. 10 but for two cases of k = 4. 


An initial effort to do this has been made using a clustering algorithm in the field of unsupervised 
machine learning. Specifically, the method of /.’-means clustering was investigated, which works by 
partitioning n observations into k clusters that are distinguished by minimising the within-cluster 
sum of squares, i.e., using Euclidean distance as a metric on the parameter space. It is well suited 
to generating globular, non-hierarchical, non-overlapping clusters, and may be computationally fast 
if k remains small. This approach could work with the parameters available in the CME detection 
analysis, such as the time, location/direction, size and speed of a CME. For example, the bulk of 
the overlapping CMEs may have different average propagation times as one may be proceeding 
slightly later in time than another. Or if the CMEs are propagating at different speeds, then a linear 
fit to each of their height-time profiles would have a different slope. Choosing these parameters of 
“average time” and “slope of a linear fit”, determined at every position angle in the span of the event 
detection, it is possible to cluster the height-time measurements into separate CMEs. 


18 



































J. P. Byme: Investigating the Kinematics of CMEs with the Automated CORIMP Catalog 


The use of clustering techniques for separating overlapping CME height-time profiles is demon¬ 
strated in Figs. 10 and 11 for the two events discussed in Sections 3.1 and 3.4, respectively. These 
figures show top plots of the k-means clustering algorithm (where k is manually prescribed by the 
user) applied to the parameters of “average time” and “slope of a linear fit”, where the means are 
plotted as black asterisks and the associated groups of points in separate clusters are plotted with 
different symbols and colours. The bottom plots of these figures show the corresponding height¬ 
time profiles that have been separated according to their clusters. In Fig. 10 the results are shown 
for both k = 3 (left plots) and k = 4 (right plots), to illustrate the effect of changing k. By inspection, 
the clustering algorithm works well at distinguishing the separate events. The bulk measurements 
of the case-study CME beginning at -06:06 UT on 2000 Jan. 02 are quite well clustered, though 
some of its later C3 measurements are wrongly determined as part of a separate CME. For this 
event the k = 3 case fares better at grouping the CMEs, while the k = 4 case splits apart the pro¬ 
file of the first CME (shown as the green and blue datapoints in the bottom right plot of Fig. 10). 
Similarly in Fig. 11 the clustering algorithms go some way towards distinguishing multiple CMEs 
in the event detection on 2001 Apr. 23, but there are datapoints that are wrongly classified, even for 
the two instances of k = 4 shown for this event. These results highlight the difficulty in applying an 
automatic extraction of separate CME height-time profiles when detected so close together in space 
and time. Furthermore, there is an inherent limitation to /c-means clustering by having to specify 
the number of clusters required from the data, which is not known a priori - especially not for an 
automated methodology such as in the CORIMP catalog. Further investigation into the parameters 
to be clustered, alternative clustering, or different machine learning algorithms, may produce better 
results. 

5. Conclusions 

As the wealth of coronagraph data and CME observations has increased dramatically since the 
launch of SOHO in 1995, it has become important to develop robust and reliable methods of de¬ 
tecting and tracking CMEs in white-light images. Since CMEs are faint and transient phenomena 
that prove difficult to consistently isolate from the background corona, manual inspection of the 
images is open to interpretation and prone to user-specific biases. Similarly, it is challenging to fix 
the criteria and thresholds necessary in a computerised methodology for automating this task, al¬ 
though advances have been made to achieve this and provide the benefit of having a self-consistent 
catalog of results. Efforts to both manually and automatically catalog CMEs have been discussed 
in Section 2 with the aim of comparing how each fares in light of the newly developed CORIMP 
catalog, which was built to overcome some of the drawbacks of current catalogs. To this end, a 
selection of CMEs was chosen from a previous study by me et a ( ), and the new results in 

the CORIMP catalog were investigated alongside the results of the automated CACTus and SEEDS 
catalogs and the manual CDAW catalog. 

In the previous study of yme et a ( ), the CMEs were characterised with the use of a 

multiscale edge-detection filter, whereby an ellipse was fitted to the isolated CME front and its apex 
tracked to produce height-time measurements. Since this approach avoided differencing the images, 
it was possible to quantify single-image uncertainties for the resulting height-time measurements, 
to be used for gauging a confidence interval on the derived CME kinematics. However, Byrne 
et e ( ) demonstrated that the often-used method of numerical differentiation using 3-point 


19 


J. P. Byme: Investigating the Kinematics of CMEs with the Automated CORIMP Catalog 


Lagrangian interpolation, and its associated error propagation, is not wholly reliable at deriving the 
true CME kinematics. This motivated the use of the Savitzky-Golay filter along with quadratic and 
linear fits to the height-time measurements in CORIMP, across the angular span of the CME such 
that the statistical spread in the kinematics of each event may better indicate the true underlying 
trends. It is therefore warranted to compare these new automatically-generated results with the 
outputs of the other catalogs. 

The spread of measurements along the angular span of the CME proves more useful than choos¬ 
ing a single fixed apex of the CME, because it propagates as an impermanent, evolving structure 
that can undergo various rates of expansion across the plane-of-sky. The variety of events chosen 
here as a subset of the thousands in the LASCO data is enough to demonstrate this. Having the 
angular spread of kinematics also provides insight to the bulk motion of the CME as well as its 
flanks and front: with the angular extent indicating the flanks and the upper values on the velocities 
indicating the CME front (usually the fastest part of its structure). Therefore a greater amount of 
information is available on the overall CME motion. 

The Savitzky-Golay filter provides an indication of the kinematic trends that a first or second- 
order fit cannot necessarily produce. Since this filter is applied in a moving-window on the data- 
points, it can be problematic in cases of events with low-sampling (as in Section 3.5), but otherwise 
performs very well at automatically quantifying the different phases of acceleration of a CME. 
Therefore the dynamics of the eruption may be better quantified and understood. 

While the robustness of the CORIMP catalog is clear (in so far as it can demonstrably produce 
results that are accurate and consistent across the data), there is a reliability issue that arises in 
cases of multiple CMEs that overlap in space and time. The problem with such cases is that another 
CME can erupt in the same direction as a previous one, close enough in time that the two detections 
are merged, as though the second CME were part of the trailing material of the first (as shown in 
Fig. 3). The opposite problem to this is that harsher thresholds would split apart single CMEs into 
multiple events, especially large CMEs with substantial trailing material. Indeed such problems can 
affect all automated catalogs, such that CORIMP appears to suffer from the former issue, while 
CACTus and SEEDS suffer from the latter. A form of unsupervised machine learning was explored, 
by applying a £-means clustering algorithm to certain parameters in the CME detections, in an 
effort to distinguish overlapping events. While these first results shown in Section 4 are promising, 
they highlight the difficulty of the task, and warrant further investigation. For example, perhaps 
a form of supervised machine learning would fare better, if a substantial training set of correctly 
labelled event data was produced from the current database of results and used to train an intelligent 
algorithm. For now, this issue is only overcome by a manual inspection of the data, as highlighted 
in the events of Section 3.1 and 3.4. In conclusion, any catalog should not be quoted blindly, as the 
thresholds cannot always distinguish the exact eruption that a user would isolate by eye. However, 
knowing this, CORIMP still offers the most rigorous details on the kinematics and morphologies of 
CMEs in a catalog to date, from which a user can infer a wealth of information. 

Acknowledgements. The SOHO/LASCO data used here are produced by a consortium of the Naval Research 
Laboratory (USA), Max-Planck-Institut fuer Aeronomie (Germany), Laboratoire d’Astronomie (France), and 
the University of Birmingham (UK). SOHO is a project of international cooperation between ESA and 
NASA. The CACTus CME catalog is generated and maintained by the SIDC at the Royal Observatory of 
Belgium. The SEEDS CME catalog has been supported by NASA Living With a Star Program and NASA 
Applied Information Systems Research Program. The CDAW Data Center CME catalog is generated and 


20 


J. P. Byrne: Investigating the Kinematics of CMEs with the Automated CORIMP Catalog 


maintained by NASA and The Catholic University of America in cooperation with the Naval Research 
Laboratory. The author acknowledges and thanks Huw Morgan (Aberystwyth University, Wales), Shadia 
Habbal (Institute for Astronomy, Hawaii), Peter Gallagher (Trinity College Dublin, Ireland) and Jackie 
Davies (RAL Space, UK) for their helpful and ongoing discussions regarding this work. The author and 
editor thank two anonymous referees for their assistance in evaluating this paper. 


References 

Brueckner, G. E., R. A. Howard, M. J. Koomen, C. M. Korendyke, D. J. Michels, et al. The Large Angle 
Spectroscopic Coronagraph (LASCO). Solar Physics, 162, 357-402, 1995. 10.1007/BF00733434. 1 

Byrne, J. P, P. T. Gallagher, R. T. J. McAteer, and C. A. Young. The kinematics of coronal mass ejec¬ 
tions using multiscale methods. Astronomy and Astrophysics , 495, 325-334, 2009. 10.1051/0004- 

6361:200809811. 3, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 5 

Byrne, J. P, D. M. Long, P. T. Gallagher, D. S. Bloomfield, S. A. Maloney, R. T. J. McAteer, H. Morgan, and 
S. R. Habbal. Improved methods for determining the kinematics of coronal mass ejections and coronal 
waves. Astronomy and Astrophysics, 557, A96, 2013. 10.1051/0004-6361/201321223. 2.1, 3, 5 

Byrne, J. P., S. A. Maloney, R. T. J. McAteer, J. M. Refojo, and P. T. Gallagher. Propagation of 
an Earth-directed coronal mass ejection in three dimensions. Nature Communications, 1, 2010. 
10.1038/ncommsl077. 1 

Byrne, J. R, H. Morgan, S. R. Habbal, and P. T. Gallagher. Automatic Detection and Tracking of Coronal 
Mass Ejections. II. Multiscale Filtering of Coronagraph Images. Astrophysical Journal, 752, 145, 2012. 
10.1088/0004-637X/752/2/145. 1,3.1 

Carley, E. P., D. M. Long, J. P. Byrne, P. Zucca, D. S. Bloomfield, J. McCauley, and P. T. Gallagher. 
Quasiperiodic acceleration of electrons by a plasmoid-driven shock in the solar atmosphere. Nature 
Physics, 9, 811-816, 2013. 10.1038/nphys2767. 1 

Chen, P. F. Coronal Mass Ejections: Models and Their Observational Basis. Living Reviews in Solar Physics, 

8 , 1 , 2011 . 1 

Colaninno, R. C., and A. Vourlidas. Analysis of the Velocity Field of CMEs Using Optical Flow Methods. 
Astrophysical Journal, 652, 1747-1754,2006. 10.1086/507943. 1 

Davis, C. J., J. A. Davies, M. Lockwood, A. P. Rouillard, C. J. Eyles, and R. A. Harrison. Stereoscopic 
imaging of an Earth-impacting solar coronal mass ejection: A major milestone for the STEREO mission. 
Geophysics Research Letters, 36,8102,2009. 10.1029/2009GL038021. 1 

Domingo, V., B. Fleck, and A. I. Poland. The SOHO Mission: an Overview. Solar Physics, 162, 1-2, 1995. 
10.1007/BF00733425. 1 

Gallagher, P. T., C. A. Young, J. P. Byrne, and R. T. J. McAteer. Coronal mass ejection detection using 
wavelets, curvelets and ridgelets: Applications for space weather monitoring. Advances in Space Research, 
47,2118-2126,2011. 10.1016/j.asr.2010.03.028. 1 


21 


J. P. Byrne: Investigating the Kinematics of CMEs with the Automated CORIMP Catalog 


Gopalswamy, N., S. Yashiro, G. Michalek, G. Stenborg, A. Vourlidas, S. Freeland, and R. Howard. The 
SOHO/LASCO CME Catalog. Earth Moon and Planets, 104, 295-313, 2009. 10.1007/s 11038-008-9282- 
7. 1, 2.4 

Goussies, N. A., M. E. Mejail, J. Jacobo, and G. Stenborg. Detection and Tracking of Coronal Mass Ejections 
Based on Supervised Segmentation and Level Set. Pattern Recognition Letters , 31(6), 496-501, 2010. 1 

Hough, P. V. C. A Method and Means for Recognizing Complex Patterns. US Patent: 3,069,654, 1962. 1 

Howard, R. A., J. D. Moses, A. Vourlidas, J. S. Newmark, D. G. Socker, et al. Sun Earth Connection Coronal 
and Heliospheric Investigation (SECCHI). Space Science Reviews , 136, 67-115, 2008. 10.1007/sl 1214- 
008-9341-4. 1 

Howard, T. A., and S. J. Tappin. Statistical survey of earthbound interplanetary shocks, associated coronal 
mass ejections and their space weather consequences. Astronomy and Astrophysics, 440, 373-383, 2005. 
10.1051/0004-6361:20053109. 1 

Hundhausen, A. J. Sizes and locations of coronal mass ejections - SMM observations from 1980 and 1984- 
1989. Journal of Geophysical Research, 98, 13,177, 1993. 10.1029/93JA00157. 1 

Illing, R. M. E., and A. J. Hundhausen. Observation of a coronal transient from 1.2 to 6 solar radii. Journal 
of Geophysical Research, 90,275-282, 1985. 10.1029/JA090iA01p00275. 1 

Kilpua, E. K. J., J. Pomoell, A. Vourlidas, R. Vainio, J. Luhmann, Y. Li, P. Schroeder, A. B. Galvin, and 
K. Simunac. STEREO observations of interplanetary coronal mass ejections and prominence deflection 
during solar minimum period. Annales Geophysicae, 27(12), 4491-4503, 2009. 1 

Koomen, M. J., C. R. Detwiler, G. E. Brueckner, H. W. Cooper, and R. Tousey. White Light Coronagraph in 
OSO-7. Applied Optics, 14, 743-751, 1975. 1 

Liu, Y. D., J. G. Luhmann, P. Kajdic, E. K. J. Kilpua, N. Lugaz, et al. Observations of an extreme storm in 
interplanetary space caused by successive coronal mass ejections. Nature Communications, 5, 3481, 2014. 
10.1038/ncomms4481. 1 

Lugaz, N., and P. Kintner. Effect of Solar Wind Drag on the Determination of the Properties of Coronal Mass 
Ejections from Heliospheric Images. Solar Physics, 47,2012. 10.1007/sl 1207-012-9948-1. 1 

MacQueen, R. M., A. Csoeke-Poeckh, E. Hildner, L. House, R. Reynolds, A. Stanger, H. Tepoel, and 
W. Wagner. The High Altitude Observatory Coronagraph/Polarimeter on the Solar Maximum Mission. 
Solar Physics, 65, 91-107, 1980. 10.1007/BF00151386. 1 

Morgan, H., J. P. Byrne, and S. R. Habbal. Automatically Detecting and Tracking Coronal Mass Ejections. I. 
Separation of Dynamic and Quiescent Components in Coronagraph Images. Astrophysical Journal, 752, 
144,2012. 10.1088/0004-637X/752/2/144. 1 

Olmedo, O., J. Zhang, H. Wechsler, A. Poland, and K. Borne. Automatic Detection and Tracking of Coronal 
Mass Ejections in Coronagraph Time Series. Solar Physics, 248, 485-499, 2008. 10.1007/sl 1207-007- 
9104-5. 1 

Plunkett, S. P, B. J. Thompson, O. C. St. Cyr, and R. A. Howard. Solar source regions of coronal mass 
ejections and their geomagnetic effects. Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics, 63, 389- 
402,2001. 10.1016/S 1364-6826(00)00166-8. 1 


22 


J. P. Byrne: Investigating the Kinematics of CMEs with the Automated CORIMP Catalog 


Pulkkinen, T. Space Weather: Terrestrial Perspective. Living Reviews in Solar Physics, 4, 1, 2007. 1 

Robbrecht, E., and D. Berghmans. Automated recognition of coronal mass ejections (CMEs) in near-real¬ 
time data. Astronomy and Astrophysics, 425, 1097-1106, 2004. 10.1051/0004-6361:20041302. 1, 2.2 

Savitzky, A., and M. Golay. Smoothing and differentiation of data by simplified least squares procedures. 
Analytical Chemistry, 36, 1627-1639, 1964. 2.1 

Schwenn, R., A. dal Lago, E. Huttunen, and W. D. Gonzalez. The association of coronal mass ejections with 
their effects near the Earth. Annales Geophysicae, 23, 1033-1059, 2005. 1 

Sheeley, N. R., Jr., D. J. Michels, R. A. Howard, and M. J. Koomen. Initial observations with the SOLWIND 
coronagraph. Astrophysical Journal, Letters, 237, L99-L101, 1980. 10.1086/183243. 1 

St. Cyr, O. C., S. P. Plunkett, D. J. Michels, S. E. Paswaters, M. J. Koomen, et al. Properties of coronal 
mass ejections: SOHO LASCO observations from January 1996 to June 1998. Journal of Geophysical 
Research, 105, 18,169-18,186, 2000. 10.1029/1999JA000381. 1 

Stenborg, G., and P. J. Cobelli. A wavelet packets equalization technique to reveal the multiple spatial- 
scale nature of coronal structures. Astronomy and Astrophysics, 398, 1185-1193, 2003. 10.1051/0004- 
6361:20021687. 1 

Webb, D. F., and T. A. Howard. Coronal Mass Ejections: Observations. Living Reviews in Solar Physics, 9, 
3, 2012. 1 

Yashiro, S., N. Gopalswamy, G. Michalek, O. C. St. Cyr, S. P. Plunkett, N. B. Rich, and R. A. Howard. A 
catalog of white light coronal mass ejections observed by the SOHO spacecraft. Journal of Geophysical 
Research (Space Physics), 109, 7105, 2004. 10.1029/2003JA010282. 1 


23